Background: The role of duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) as an early detection and intervention target to improve outcomes for individuals with first-episode psychosis is unknown. Study design: PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review to identify studies until February 1, 2023, with an intervention and a control group, reporting DUP in both groups. Random effects meta-analysis to evaluate (1) differences in DUP in early detection/intervention services vs the control group, (2) the efficacy of early detection strategies regarding eight real-world outcomes at baseline (service entry), and (3) the efficacy of early intervention strategies on ten real-world outcomes at follow-up. We conducted quality assessment, heterogeneity, publication bias, and meta-regression analyses (PROSPERO: CRD42020163640). Study results: From 6229 citations, 33 intervention studies were retrieved. The intervention group achieved a small DUP reduction (Hedges' g = 0.168, 95% CI = 0.055-0.283) vs the control group. The early detection group had better functioning levels (g = 0.281, 95% CI = 0.073-0.488) at baseline. Both groups did not differ regarding total psychopathology, admission rates, quality of life, positive/negative/depressive symptoms, and employment rates (P > .05). Early interventions improved quality of life (g = 0.600, 95% CI = 0.408-0.791), employment rates (g = 0.427, 95% CI = 0.135-0.718), negative symptoms (g = 0.417, 95% CI = 0.153-0.682), relapse rates (g = 0.364, 95% CI = 0.117-0.612), admissions rates (g = 0.335, 95% CI = 0.198-0.468), total psychopathology (g = 0.298, 95% CI = 0.014-0.582), depressive symptoms (g = 0.268, 95% CI = 0.008-0.528), and functioning (g = 0.180, 95% CI = 0.065-0.295) at follow-up but not positive symptoms or remission (P > .05). Conclusions: Comparing interventions targeting DUP and control groups, the impact of early detection strategies on DUP and other correlates is limited. However, the impact of early intervention was significant regarding relevant outcomes, underscoring the importance of supporting early intervention services worldwide.

Duration of Untreated Psychosis and Outcomes in First-Episode Psychosis: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Early Detection and Intervention Strategies

Fusar-Poli, Paolo;
2024-01-01

Abstract

Background: The role of duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) as an early detection and intervention target to improve outcomes for individuals with first-episode psychosis is unknown. Study design: PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review to identify studies until February 1, 2023, with an intervention and a control group, reporting DUP in both groups. Random effects meta-analysis to evaluate (1) differences in DUP in early detection/intervention services vs the control group, (2) the efficacy of early detection strategies regarding eight real-world outcomes at baseline (service entry), and (3) the efficacy of early intervention strategies on ten real-world outcomes at follow-up. We conducted quality assessment, heterogeneity, publication bias, and meta-regression analyses (PROSPERO: CRD42020163640). Study results: From 6229 citations, 33 intervention studies were retrieved. The intervention group achieved a small DUP reduction (Hedges' g = 0.168, 95% CI = 0.055-0.283) vs the control group. The early detection group had better functioning levels (g = 0.281, 95% CI = 0.073-0.488) at baseline. Both groups did not differ regarding total psychopathology, admission rates, quality of life, positive/negative/depressive symptoms, and employment rates (P > .05). Early interventions improved quality of life (g = 0.600, 95% CI = 0.408-0.791), employment rates (g = 0.427, 95% CI = 0.135-0.718), negative symptoms (g = 0.417, 95% CI = 0.153-0.682), relapse rates (g = 0.364, 95% CI = 0.117-0.612), admissions rates (g = 0.335, 95% CI = 0.198-0.468), total psychopathology (g = 0.298, 95% CI = 0.014-0.582), depressive symptoms (g = 0.268, 95% CI = 0.008-0.528), and functioning (g = 0.180, 95% CI = 0.065-0.295) at follow-up but not positive symptoms or remission (P > .05). Conclusions: Comparing interventions targeting DUP and control groups, the impact of early detection strategies on DUP and other correlates is limited. However, the impact of early intervention was significant regarding relevant outcomes, underscoring the importance of supporting early intervention services worldwide.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11571/1493335
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact